zlib 1.2.0
This commit is contained in:
@@ -59,10 +59,10 @@ but saves time since there are both fewer insertions and fewer searches.
|
||||
|
||||
2.1 Introduction
|
||||
|
||||
The real question is, given a Huffman tree, how to decode fast. The most
|
||||
important realization is that shorter codes are much more common than
|
||||
longer codes, so pay attention to decoding the short codes fast, and let
|
||||
the long codes take longer to decode.
|
||||
The key question is how to represent a Huffman code (or any prefix code) so
|
||||
that you can decode fast. The most important characteristic is that shorter
|
||||
codes are much more common than longer codes, so pay attention to decoding the
|
||||
short codes fast, and let the long codes take longer to decode.
|
||||
|
||||
inflate() sets up a first level table that covers some number of bits of
|
||||
input less than the length of longest code. It gets that many bits from the
|
||||
@@ -77,20 +77,16 @@ table took no time (and if you had infinite memory), then there would only
|
||||
be a first level table to cover all the way to the longest code. However,
|
||||
building the table ends up taking a lot longer for more bits since short
|
||||
codes are replicated many times in such a table. What inflate() does is
|
||||
simply to make the number of bits in the first table a variable, and set it
|
||||
for the maximum speed.
|
||||
simply to make the number of bits in the first table a variable, and then
|
||||
to set that variable for the maximum speed.
|
||||
|
||||
inflate() sends new trees relatively often, so it is possibly set for a
|
||||
smaller first level table than an application that has only one tree for
|
||||
all the data. For inflate, which has 286 possible codes for the
|
||||
literal/length tree, the size of the first table is nine bits. Also the
|
||||
distance trees have 30 possible values, and the size of the first table is
|
||||
six bits. Note that for each of those cases, the table ended up one bit
|
||||
longer than the ``average'' code length, i.e. the code length of an
|
||||
approximately flat code which would be a little more than eight bits for
|
||||
286 symbols and a little less than five bits for 30 symbols. It would be
|
||||
interesting to see if optimizing the first level table for other
|
||||
applications gave values within a bit or two of the flat code size.
|
||||
For inflate, which has 286 possible codes for the literal/length tree, the size
|
||||
of the first table is nine bits. Also the distance trees have 30 possible
|
||||
values, and the size of the first table is six bits. Note that for each of
|
||||
those cases, the table ended up one bit longer than the ``average'' code
|
||||
length, i.e. the code length of an approximately flat code which would be a
|
||||
little more than eight bits for 286 symbols and a little less than five bits
|
||||
for 30 symbols.
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
2.2 More details on the inflate table lookup
|
||||
@@ -158,7 +154,7 @@ Let's make the first table three bits long (eight entries):
|
||||
110: -> table X (gobble 3 bits)
|
||||
111: -> table Y (gobble 3 bits)
|
||||
|
||||
Each entry is what the bits decode to and how many bits that is, i.e. how
|
||||
Each entry is what the bits decode as and how many bits that is, i.e. how
|
||||
many bits to gobble. Or the entry points to another table, with the number of
|
||||
bits to gobble implicit in the size of the table.
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
Reference in New Issue
Block a user